You can get dizzy reading these threads at times
But I think there's a difference between downloading for nothing music which is available to be bought, whether on a CD or now as a download, recording and putting bootleg clips from shows on YT, and getting hold of bootleg tapes/discs of whole concerts.
In the interview Meat was talking about the first. Personally I liked his analogies as I said, I agree with him, and it is something the industry needs to grapple with, because I think it must affect sales overall, and it is theft, does deprive the artist of income, and I do not and would not do this. As Mouse has said, if you can afford to get on-line, you can save to buy hard copy or downloads. And there are usually clips on the retail sites to get a feel for the kind of track or album you'll be buying.
Imo Meat's reasons for not wanting recordings made at concerts and put on YT are different. They are not legal, and whatever his reasons he is entitled to want that law upheld, and I respect that. His business, his choice. The fact that the law prohibits you from doing something you'd like to do doesn't negate the fact that it is law. That an artist seeks to have that law applied to his work, even if you disagree with his reasons for doing so, or think you know better than him, doesn't remove that right.
Bootleg concert tapes or discs are yet another issue. They too are not legal. But beyond that, I can fully understand any artist wanting to have some active control over the quality of work put out with his name on it. Meat's occupation listed on his profile is "making sure it's right". I think that speaks volumes
Caryl